BoxRec

that's what I read in these pages over my coffee this morning. So, do you put Lewis in the top 5 ever, or not?

personally, I don't think you can include somebody at that level who gets KO'd twice and I also think sure Lewis was very good, but he often came in looking huge and a lot of his success was down to his sheer size. I wouldn't put him in my top 10 or even 15.

NorthEastBoxingFan wrote:that's what I read in these pages over my coffee this morning. So, do you put Lewis in the top 5 ever, or not?

personally, I don't think you can include somebody at that level who gets KO'd twice and I also think sure Lewis was very good, but he often came in looking huge and a lot of his success was down to his sheer size. I wouldn't put him in my top 10 or even 15.

A lot of Ali's success was due to size too - he was 6'4 1/2 - with an 86 inch reach -so should we disregard him too.

His success was down to having great technical skills, and a great jab, and a thunderous right hand, and a calm temperament. He also had a better chin than his two losses suggest. His one weakness was complacency, he took both Rahman and McCall far too lightly, and paid the price. He also avenged both those losses in emphatic style.

Name 15 heavyweights who were better - and explain why.

His success was largely due to his size? Hmm, not sure about that.

jamesmcdonnell wrote:

NorthEastBoxingFan wrote:that's what I read in these pages over my coffee this morning. So, do you put Lewis in the top 5 ever, or not?

personally, I don't think you can include somebody at that level who gets KO'd twice and I also think sure Lewis was very good, but he often came in looking huge and a lot of his success was down to his sheer size. I wouldn't put him in my top 10 or even 15.

A lot of Ali's success was due to size too - he was 6'4 1/2 - with an 86 inch reach -so should we disregard him too.

His success was down to having great technical skills, and a great jab, and a thunderous right hand, and a calm temperament. He also had a better chin than his two losses suggest. His one weakness was complacency, he took both Rahman and McCall far too lightly, and paid the price. He also avenged both those losses in emphatic style.

Name 15 heavyweights who were better - and explain why.

Ali was 6'3.

Top 5, probably not. But to not have him in your top 15 is laughable.

No.

Now I'm a Lennox fan and he was a fantastic boxer but Top 5 guys don't lose to Oliver McCall or Hasim Rahman, I believe the result against Ray Mercer could have gone either way too.

banjo wrote:No.

Now I'm a Lennox fan and he was a fantastic boxer but Top 5 guys don't lose to Oliver McCall or Hasim Rahman, I believe the result against Ray Mercer could have gone either way too.

Spot on

Would never have seen the real greats rolling around the canvas against McCall and Rahman. But he is top ten, which is no mean feat in itself, and shouldn't be seen as an insult

Lewis is massively underated, criminally so.

Ali is actually the only heavyweight I can think of where I can make a compelling case for someone being better than Lewis. I genuinely mean that.

Riddick Bowe is the only name missing from Lewis's resume and he beat everyone easily in an era of heavweights which apart from the golden era of Ali, Louis etc was the best era going.

Wrists wrote:Lewis is massively underated, criminally so.

Ali is actually the only heavyweight I can think of where I can make a compelling case for someone being better than Lewis. I genuinely mean that.

Riddick Bowe is the only name missing from Lewis's resume and he beat everyone easily in an era of heavweights which apart from the golden era of Ali, Louis etc was the best era going.

Beating on old Holyfield (just, maybe) and a shot to shit Tyson doesn't make him some sort of king of a generation. They had their peaks at different times, but it is like saying Joe mastered Hopkins (just, maybe) and Roy Jones because he got them when they were aged

jamesmcdonnell wrote:

NorthEastBoxingFan wrote:that's what I read in these pages over my coffee this morning. So, do you put Lewis in the top 5 ever, or not?

personally, I don't think you can include somebody at that level who gets KO'd twice and I also think sure Lewis was very good, but he often came in looking huge and a lot of his success was down to his sheer size. I wouldn't put him in my top 10 or even 15.

A lot of Ali's success was due to size too - he was 6'4 1/2 - with an 86 inch reach -so should we disregard him too.

His success was down to having great technical skills, and a great jab, and a thunderous right hand, and a calm temperament. He also had a better chin than his two losses suggest. His one weakness was complacency, he took both Rahman and McCall far too lightly, and paid the price. He also avenged both those losses in emphatic style.

Name 15 heavyweights who were better - and explain why.

sorry - there's been confusion - which I never caused - I meant Top 5 full stop, regardless of whichever weight. That's what I read in the Price Chisora thread today, and so was born this thread.

(you didn't think I'd have Lewis in my Top 15 Heavyweights?? Let me reassure you, he'd comfortably be in such a list )

Deadendgeneration wrote:Top 5, probably not. But to not have him in your top 15 is laughable.

I just think that if I sat down for 5 or 10 minutes and thought about it, there'd be guys like Chavez, Nunn (I admit I never actually saw Nunn, just happen to be reading about him right now ), Leonard, Calzaghe, Mayweather,Joe Louis, Ali, Robinson.....it doesn't take that long to find your self hustled out of my top 15

NorthEastBoxingFan wrote:

Deadendgeneration wrote:Top 5, probably not. But to not have him in your top 15 is laughable.

I just think that if I sat down for 5 or 10 minutes and thought about it, there'd be guys like Chavez, Nunn (I admit I never actually saw Nunn, just happen to be reading about him right now ), Leonard, Calzaghe, Mayweather,Joe Louis, Ali, Robinson.....it doesn't take that long to find your self hustled out of my top 15

Did I just see Calzaghe's name mentioned there within those names?

NorthEastBoxingFan wrote:that's what I read in these pages over my coffee this morning. So, do you put Lewis in the top 5 ever, or not?

personally, I don't think you can include somebody at that level who gets KO'd twice and I also think sure Lewis was very good, but he often came in looking huge and a lot of his success was down to his sheer size. I wouldn't put him in my top 10 or even 15.

Frazier was KO'd twice by Foreman... Patterson's been stopped, Liston etc

He avenged both defeated, esp the Rahman in style. If you watch the Rahman II fight you realise how got he actual was in a pretty good era. He could punch body and head, hook and uppercut, move and scrap. A complete contrast to Wlads, staright shot and hold style. He's one of the greatest HW's that's for sure

If we could create a 240 pound 6 foot 5 inch James Jeffries then maybe he would beat Lennox. But that bloke never existed.

Lennox had size plus skill plus intelligence plus great KO power…that’s a formidable portfolio.

Many of the great heavies had size advantages. Just the way it is.

Is Lennox top 5? It’s a personal choice. It’s totally justifiable to have him in a top 5…or to not have in your top 5…harder to imagine him outside a top 10…and outside a top 15 seems impossible…but I’m always open to being proved wrong.

danconnollyeire wrote:

NorthEastBoxingFan wrote:that's what I read in these pages over my coffee this morning. So, do you put Lewis in the top 5 ever, or not?

personally, I don't think you can include somebody at that level who gets KO'd twice and I also think sure Lewis was very good, but he often came in looking huge and a lot of his success was down to his sheer size. I wouldn't put him in my top 10 or even 15.

Frazier was KO'd twice by Foreman... Patterson's been stopped, Liston etc

He avenged both defeated, esp the Rahman in style. If you watch the Rahman II fight you realise how got he actual was in a pretty good era. He could punch body and head, hook and uppercut, move and scrap. A complete contrast to Wlads, staright shot and hold style. He's one of the greatest HW's that's for sure

Did you just compare Frazier being stopped by Foreman to Lewis being stopped by Hasim bloody Rahman??

columbo wrote:

jamesmcdonnell wrote:

NorthEastBoxingFan wrote:that's what I read in these pages over my coffee this morning. So, do you put Lewis in the top 5 ever, or not?

personally, I don't think you can include somebody at that level who gets KO'd twice and I also think sure Lewis was very good, but he often came in looking huge and a lot of his success was down to his sheer size. I wouldn't put him in my top 10 or even 15.

A lot of Ali's success was due to size too - he was 6'4 1/2 - with an 86 inch reach -so should we disregard him too.

His success was down to having great technical skills, and a great jab, and a thunderous right hand, and a calm temperament. He also had a better chin than his two losses suggest. His one weakness was complacency, he took both Rahman and McCall far too lightly, and paid the price. He also avenged both those losses in emphatic style.

Name 15 heavyweights who were better - and explain why.

Ali was 6'3.

So he was, think I was thinking of Foreman.

Are we talking top 5 P4P or top 5 Heavyweight?

Ezzard wrote:If we could create a 240 pound 6 foot 5 inch James Jeffries then maybe he would beat Lennox. But that bloke never existed.

Lennox had size plus skill plus intelligence plus great KO power…that’s a formidable portfolio.

Many of the great heavies had size advantages. Just the way it is.

Is Lennox top 5? It’s a personal choice. It’s totally justifiable to have him in a top 5…or to not have in your top 5…harder to imagine him outside a top 10…and outside a top 15 seems impossible…but I’m always open to being proved wrong.

Jim Jeffries was what 6'2"-6'3" - and was a very powerful man, about 240 in his prime I believe, and a real specimen - with crushing power - he gets overlooked because he fought in a different era, but I remember that Nat Fleischer of the ring, had Jeffries as his all time greatest heavyweight.

217-218 at his peak, but with modern methods he could easily have bulked up to 230, and really 220 is plenty if it's natural size.

thepocketrocket wrote:

NorthEastBoxingFan wrote:

Deadendgeneration wrote:Top 5, probably not. But to not have him in your top 15 is laughable.

I just think that if I sat down for 5 or 10 minutes and thought about it, there'd be guys like Chavez, Nunn (I admit I never actually saw Nunn, just happen to be reading about him right now ), Leonard, Calzaghe, Mayweather,Joe Louis, Ali, Robinson.....it doesn't take that long to find your self hustled out of my top 15

Did I just see Calzaghe's name mentioned there within those names?

jejeje yeah, no shit, someone hide the coffee quick smart!

thepocketrocket wrote:

danconnollyeire wrote:

NorthEastBoxingFan wrote:that's what I read in these pages over my coffee this morning. So, do you put Lewis in the top 5 ever, or not?

personally, I don't think you can include somebody at that level who gets KO'd twice and I also think sure Lewis was very good, but he often came in looking huge and a lot of his success was down to his sheer size. I wouldn't put him in my top 10 or even 15.

Frazier was KO'd twice by Foreman... Patterson's been stopped, Liston etc

He avenged both defeated, esp the Rahman in style. If you watch the Rahman II fight you realise how got he actual was in a pretty good era. He could punch body and head, hook and uppercut, move and scrap. A complete contrast to Wlads, staright shot and hold style. He's one of the greatest HW's that's for sure

Did you just compare Frazier being stopped by Foreman to Lewis being stopped by Hasim bloody Rahman??

good point.

and yes I did put Calzaghe in there. Different physicalities will lend themselves to different styles of fighter, but for me I think a tip-top Joe was better than a tip-top Lennox.

NorthEastBoxingFan wrote:

Deadendgeneration wrote:Top 5, probably not. But to not have him in your top 15 is laughable.

I just think that if I sat down for 5 or 10 minutes and thought about it, there'd be guys like Chavez, Nunn (I admit I never actually saw Nunn, just happen to be reading about him right now ), Leonard, Calzaghe, Mayweather,Joe Louis, Ali, Robinson.....it doesn't take that long to find your self hustled out of my top 15

Similarly to another poster, I had no idea you were talking p4p. Lewis top 5 p4p is more laughable than not having him as atop 15 heavyweight.

Chris W 1982 wrote:Are we talking top 5 P4P or top 5 Heavyweight?

P4P. It was always a P4P list.

Deadendgeneration wrote:

NorthEastBoxingFan wrote:

Deadendgeneration wrote:Top 5, probably not. But to not have him in your top 15 is laughable.

I just think that if I sat down for 5 or 10 minutes and thought about it, there'd be guys like Chavez, Nunn (I admit I never actually saw Nunn, just happen to be reading about him right now ), Leonard, Calzaghe, Mayweather,Joe Louis, Ali, Robinson.....it doesn't take that long to find your self hustled out of my top 15

Similarly to another poster, I had no idea you were talking p4p. Lewis top 5 p4p is more laughable than not having him as atop 15 heavyweight.

exactly. But I read otherwise this morning in another thread, so rather than get into it there I thought I'd start a thread over it.

POUND 4 POUND GUYS

Ah P4P certainly not although I'd struggle to have any heavyweights in there.